WHAT'S IN A NAME?

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 12481, 18 April 1906, Page 8

WHAT'S IN A NAME?

Mr Oooper (Wellington) moved that the name of Uie ongari«ahon l:e changed to '"the Independent Labour Party of New Zealand." Ho declared that at tho lav! election a groat deal of mi-ype-prt-sen ration occurred in. Wellington, ■the Government candidates securing many votes for Liberal and Labour Federation candidates by underhand methods. Many peopl , : , were led to IveJieve that the t«o organisations were oho and the same. Objection to t<he inclusion, of tho word "independent" was taken by tho Diuu'din d.'i'. rjate-s, and an ainondme'it was niaved (ha* i'- be deleted. Mr MeCuilongh objected to motion nnd amendment, as ho did not. see any to change a name which was making: itself feared and respcUd. Th oiTsidL-nt conenrre:! in M* Mc-Ciillc-ugli'* view, and contended that tht> word "'independent'" was cH=r>ntial. After both motion and amendment wore rejected, t Jie name remain in'j; unaltered. independence ok compromise. The following motion was n:ovod by Mr (»ray (Wanganui): " Th.v where, through force of circsnnMsinfOs. branches cannot put up candidates ot their own, they suoiild Ik; given th-.» option of {jiving their 6iippoit to such candidate or candidates they might deoni it expedient to support." Mv firay said there wore tinie-s when i: was impossible for a branch to brine; out a candidate, and in that case, it would be better to support the man standing, but only for the o:.e election, and until the branch obtained a candidate of its own.

j .Mr Campbell (Taihapo) strongly opj pored tlie motion, and declared tha' in Australia much trouble hnd been caup.?d by that ccmiso; outside candidates were "nlmost an good as a Lab ur MTi'lidate." until they p;ot Lnto tie Houh? : and then they "ratiw]." Th<> party to ki«p away from cut-side : partk-fi. .Mr McLaren (Petone , ) denrecatetl the idea; they would have branch'.-s in different parts nipportiny (Joven- ,- •me lit and Opposition eandidatt*, and tlio Lal>oiir Party would not be tak-u ( (M>rioHsly. It would be far better to I pursue its own couive.

The President observed that mucu might be said on both eices. l> soemed to him that the strength ot the workers ehould be utilisod, and not wasted when they did not have a candidate of their own. By supporting a candidate they would liavo eanio claim on his gratitude, and might win him to their ranks. It must be remembered lhat tho party wais ouly '» it* lniancy in New Zealand, and cou.d not exercise such an innuendo as Uie ljabour parties did in .iUc>tralia «'uul England. 110 claimed thai tlic party haa helped to return six Labour members—at Wanganui. Taranaki, and Dunedin—bui aid not get credit tor retuining one. An to the policy ot tJio party, he thought the paity jn tlie Hun.-*. , would be justified in Mipporting a Liberal Oorermuent in power to pass benericial lneaeures. But there must bo no alliance with the Conservatives.

Mr McCullougli sa.:<l he pivi'crred the strictest independence. i Ho would have no objection to labour members in the Houso deciding by caucus what iiction they should tako in regard to die other 'parties. Tho labour party in Au.-tralia had always niaiiiMined strict independence, ajul i<. would never have a-ttoined iUs prewnt succvi« but for that. Tliey should waii iUMI work for an labour i>a,r;3-, and admit of no tomwith toaiters for votos.

Otlior delegiites in favour of ab-olutc independence. '1 lu l motion w;**> rejected by a large majority.

Mr Cooper movod that the attitude of the League, towards t.he Conservative and Liberal parlies b<; left to the Labour party iii Parliament to decide according to the exigencies of tho occasion.

Mr Campbell moved, as an amendment, "That tho attitude of the Labour party towards t.he Liberal and Conservative panics l>o one of absolute indeIK'iidenoe." The amendment was earned. PROPOSAL TO ABOLISH THE "PLEDGE." Mr Gray (Wanganui) moved a motion designed to greatly rnodrfy tho pledge required, from monibertv or eliminate it. altogether, tho latter course- for preference. He argued that many me.n wlio were in sympathy with tho broad principles of the League oould not agree as to details, and therefore did nob join. Tho motion found no seconder, and accordingly lapsed. LIQUOR QUESTIONS. Tho President moved on behalf of tho Wellington branch—"That the reduction on tho licensing ballot paper be withdrawn, and replaced by the question, 'Are you in favour of State control without eonipen.-auon.'" He argued that State monopoly of tho liquor traffic was tho proper solution of tho difficuly, and not prohibition. The country, he was assured, would carry such an issue.

Mr Hood (bunedin) stated that individually ho supported State control, but he should oppose, tooth and nail, any proposal to include it in tho policy of the League. They should leave tho question to tho publicans end prohibitionists to fight over; if introduced, it would bring trouble to tho League. Other delegates opposed the motion, some on moral grounds, and others from motives of expediency. In replying, the President said ho believed in tlie League settling all <ho questions that came beforo it. However, he desired to make it clear that he moved the motion pro forma. The motion was lost by an overwhelming majority. Tho President further moved, pro forma—"Tluit where restoration is carried in no-license districts, tho sale of liquor be carried on by the .State." The motion was lost. Tho Conference adjourned at 10.50 p.m. until 7'o'clock this evening.